Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 Supreme(Raj) 1775

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, Banwari Lal Sharma, JJ.
Mushtaq - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal (Jail) Appeal No. 993 of 2008 with Criminal Appeal Nos. 698, 1111 and 1169 of 2008 and Criminal Revision Petition No. 1235 of 2008.
Decided On : 31-08-2015

For the Appellant:Anshuman Saxena, Prithvi Raj Singh and Neeraj Tiwari, Advocates.
For the Respondent:N.A. Naqvi, Sr. Advocate with Mukesh Kumar Meena, Advocate.
For the Acquitted Accused respondents to the State Appeal:Reashm Bhargava, Advocate.
For the State: Meenakshi Pareek, Public Prosecutor.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of credible evidence, the impact of over-implication due to motive, and the significance of timely reporting and reaching the special report to the Magistrate.

Headnote:
Murder - Criminal Law - Section 302 IPC, Section 4/25 of the Arms Act - The court acquitted the accused Abrar and Vakeel Ahmad, and convicted Mushtaq for the offense under Section 302 IPC and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act. The trial court's decision was appealed by the convicted accused and the State of Rajasthan to assail the acquittal of other accused. The court extended the benefit of doubt to Vakeel Ahmad and Abrar, acquitting them of the charges. The appeal by Mushtaq was dismissed, and the acquittal of Mohammad Haneef, Abdul Wahid, Saeed, and Aqeel was upheld.
Fact of the Case:

On 29.7.2004, Mohammad Sadiq was murdered by multiple assailants armed with knives, lathi, iron rods, and a bottle. The prosecution alleged that Mushtaq, Abrar, and Vakeel Ahmad were involved in the attack. The deceased's brother submitted a written report, and the case was registered at the same time. The post-mortem report revealed nine injuries, and nineteen witnesses were examined, including eye-witnesses and those who attested to the dying declaration of the deceased.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the injuries were caused by Mushtaq alone, and the involvement of other accused was doubtful. It noted that the witnesses had exaggerated the occurrence by implicating other accused, and there was a motive for introducing them due to a continuous dispute. The court also highlighted the delay in reaching the special report to the Magistrate, inferring over-implication. Consequently, the court acquitted Vakeel Ahmad and Abrar, dismissed the appeal by Mushtaq, and upheld the acquittal of Mohammad Haneef, Abdul Wahid, Saeed, and Aqeel.
Issues: The issues revolved around the identification of the assailants, the credibility of the witnesses, the delay in reaching the special report to the Magistrate, and the motive for implicating the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the doubt cast on the involvement of the accused other than Mushtaq, the over-implication due to a motive, and the delay in reaching the special report to the Magistrate.
Final Decision: The court acquitted Vakeel Ahmad and Abrar, dismissed the appeal by Mushtaq, and upheld the acquittal of Mohammad Haneef, Abdul Wahid, Saeed, and Aqeel.

JUDGMENT

1. (Oral) - On 29.7.2004 at about 8.30 PM, Mohammad Sadiq elder brother of Mohammad Arif (P.W.1) complainant was murdered opposite shop of Ramesh Kumar (P.W.7) at Jharneshwar Road, Andarkot, Ajmer.Case of the prosecution before the trial court was that accused Abrar and Vakeel Ahmad had caught hold of hands of Mohammad Sadiq whereas Mushtaq s/o Gaus Mohammad, Mohammad Haneef s/o Gafoor, Abdul Wahid, Saeed and Aqeel all sons of Mohammad Haneef alongwith Latif s/o Gafoor and Wasim @ Ikrar s/o Gaus Mohammad caused injuries to Mohammad Sadiq. Latif and Wasim @ Ikrar were summoned as additional accused by the trial court after invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C. We are informed by Shri Neeraj Tiwari, learned counsel for accused-appellant Abrar, that the revision petition was allowed by this court and the order summoning Latif and Wasim @ Ikrar as additional accused was quashed.

2. The learned trial court acquitted Mohammad Haneef s/o Gafoor and Abdul Wahid, Saeed and Aqeel all three sons of Mohammad Haneef vide impugned judgment dated 30.6.2008. However, vide said impugned judgment, the trial court convicted Mushtaq for offence under Section 302 IPC and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and Abrar s/o Gaus Mohammad and Vakeel Ahmad s/o Mohammad Haneef under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Having convicted the above said three appellants, the trial court vide a separate order of even date sentenced them as under:-

"Accused, Mushtaq:

U/s. 302 IPC: Life imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default thereof to undergo six months simple imprisonment.

U/s. 4/25, Arms Act: One year rigorous imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default thereof to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

Accused, Abrar and Vakeel Ahmad:

U/s. 302 r.w. 34 IPC: Life imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default thereof to undergo six months simple imprisonment."

3. Aggrieved against conviction and sentence, Mushtaq has preferred D.B. Criminal Appeal No.993/2008, Vakeel Ahmad has instituted D.B. Criminal Appeal No.698/2008 and Abrar has filed D.B. Criminal Appeal No.1111/2008. We shall decide three separate appeals filed by the convicted accused along with the appeal preferred by the State of Rajasthan bearing D.B. Criminal Appeal No.1169/2008 to assail acquittal of Mohammad Haneef and his three sons namely Abdul Wahid, Saeed and Aqeel along with D.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.1235/2008 preferred by the complainant Mohammad Arif also to assail acquittal of above said persons.

4. Criminal proceedings in the present case were set into motion on written report (Ex.P.1) submitted by Mohammad Arif brother of deceased Mohammad Sadiq before Madan Dan Singh (P.W.19) who was then posted as SHO, P.S. Dargah, District Ajmer. Written report (Ex.P.1) submitted by Mohammad Arif (P.W.1) on the basis of which formal FIR (Ex.P.2) bearing FIR No.106/2004 was registered at Police Station Dargah, District Ajmer, when translated into English reads as under:-

"To,

The SHO Sahab,

P.S. Dargah, Ajmer.

Sub.: Regarding murder of my brother Mohammad Sadiq.

Sir,

It is submitted that my brother Mohammad Sadiq on 29.7.2004 at about 8.30 PM or 9.00 PM was going towards his house. When in order to smoke a cigarette he stopped at Ramesh General Store then Mushtaq s/o Gaus Mohammad, Abrar s/o Gaus Mohammad, Haneef s/o Gafoor, Wahid s/o Haneef, Saeed s/o Haneef, Aqeel s/o Haneef, Vakeel s/o Haneef came armed with knives, lathi, iron rods and bottle. Immediately on arrival they attacked him with knife. They caught hold of him and attacked him with lathi and knife. After throwing him on the road while giving abuses they left the spot. We were having dispute and fight with them over the house. Near our house, Haneef s/o Gafoor has built a house. Since then he and his sons do something in front of our house. They keep an evil eye on our sisters and daughters. Upon saying something they pick-up a fight. Due to this reason today these persons on public road had committed murde

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

2015 Supreme(Raj) 1775

The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of credible evidence, the impact of over-implication due to motive, and the significance of timely reporting and reaching the special report to the Magistrate.

Cases Referred (1)

Judicial Analysis